From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.mhcomputing.net (master.mhcomputing.net [74.208.228.170]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0D1A8DAF for ; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 01:25:22 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.mhcomputing.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B01FF1BB; Sat, 21 Nov 2015 19:25:18 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 19:25:18 -0500 From: Matthew Hall To: Thomas Monjalon Message-ID: <20151122002518.GA7196@mhcomputing.net> References: <20151121084935.GA24056@mhcomputing.net> <2295250.tyqBLnBnCL@xps13> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2295250.tyqBLnBnCL@xps13> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] difficulty w/ RTE_NEXT_ABI X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 00:25:23 -0000 On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 11:44:20AM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > The new mbuf provides packet type instead of flags. > So the processing in this function is changed and the variable name is > different to reflect this. But the data type of the variable is the same, and this is an internal always_inline function. So again I am confused what advantage we got from RTE_NEXT_ABI here, and how you have multiple copies of RTE_NEXT_ABI on a single symbol when it is a binary variable. This doesn't really answer the bigger question about the reasoning. Matthew.